15 Reasons JJ "Ruined & Destroyed" Star Trek

Shock of shocks, there is a Trek fan out there (just one!) who had the balls to not only dislike JJ Abrams 2009 film Star Trek, but also took it upon himself to outline in nauseating detail (and poor spelling and grammar by the way) his fifteen (fifteen!) reasons why.

Frankly, I'm surprised that no one in the past three years has brought any of these issues up. Food for thought, to be sure.

A few of those have crossed my mind since the movie came out, but have been filed under 'don't care'. The drill disrupting communications, Nero and crew being on Rhura Pente for 25 years, but the ship just happened to still be there when it was time to break out, the brewery/engine room, red matter, etc. This isn't one of those movies that I wanted tight story logic and scientific accuracy, it's sci fi, they can do whatever they wanted. I just wanted to be enterained for a few hours and the movie succeeded. Most movies could be picked apart for their flaws and if a movie was written to make perfect sense and timing, the movie would probably be pretty boring.

I'm still waiting for the three hours of bonus scenes in which "characters stand around debating the merits of saving the Andorian Ambassador from the surface of Cylax Four until you just wish everyone was dead."

I'm still waiting for the three hours of bonus scenes in which "characters stand around debating the merits of saving the Andorian Ambassador from the surface of Cylax Four until you just wish everyone was dead."

Click to expand...

That's every TRUE Star Trek fan's favorite part.

I think this 'Star Trek fan' is the one that William Shatner was talking directly to in that infamous SNL skit when he said "Get a life!"

Seriously, this guy has apparently been stewing over what he didn't like about the movie for over three years now? And he just finally posts this drivel to the internet?

I only went down to about number 11 and got bored with the same old nitpicks. These issues have been debated ad nauseum.

The Engine Room has been compared numerous times with pictures to TOS Engine Room, and they both have the exact same features.

IMHO, the biggest problem with the 2009 Film was that there was so much Introduction that needed to be done, there wasn't a whole lot of time for all this deep Characterization. I believe, though it will still almost certainly be an intense action flick, we'll get much more indepth character stuff with Star Trek Into Darkness.

I'm still waiting for the three hours of bonus scenes in which "characters stand around debating the merits of saving the Andorian Ambassador from the surface of Cylax Four until you just wish everyone was dead."

Click to expand...

That's every TRUE Star Trek fan's favorite part.

I think this 'Star Trek fan' is the one that William Shatner was talking directly to in that infamous SNL skit when he said "Get a life!"

Seriously, this guy has apparently been stewing over what he didn't like about the movie for over three years now? And he just finally posts this drivel to the internet?

Click to expand...

Not only just now posts it on the 'net, but it passes for a "headline" regarding 'Trek. Enough so, ever Trek board and fansite out there--it seems--is reporting on it

I used to dislike the '09 movie with a passion. Had issues with trying to make it all work in "canon" and all that old noise. Still don't like the Engine Room set. But you know what, I actually enjoy it as a fun little popcorn-flick on it's own merits. I stopped worrying about how it was supposed to fit with the older stuff, took it for its own thing, and moved on. I still think it's more action and style over substance and story, but that's okay; sometimes that's all someone needs out of a movie.

Nero and crew being on Rhura Pente for 25 years, but the ship just happened to still be there when it was time to break out

Click to expand...

Actually, Uhura wasn't very specific.

I was tracking solar systems and I picked up an emergency transmission from a Klingon prison planet. A Klingon armada was destroyed, 47 ships.

Click to expand...

That's ALL we got.

It's perfectly conceivable that Narada was being held in a remote research facility, but the Klingons never figured out how to dismantle it, or even take control of its systems. According to non-canon source, "Star Trek: Countdown", the ship was retrofitted with some reverse-engineered 24th century Borg technology which made it adaptable and impregnable.

Nero could have escaped, spent quite a bit of time looking for it, then steal it back and use it to free his comrades from Rura Penthe.

There's a fuckton of retarded shit in this movie, but the fans' capacity to overblow things never ceases to amaze.

For me it was an OK movie nothing really special. But I think people expected too much from the film and people don't realise that JJ did not make this just for the fans. Lets face it Hollywood wants money and appeal to the mass audience, so if they made a movie just aimed at fans like us it wont work. It needs to be a block buster that will attract a massive audience. But hay that's my opinion

Nero and crew being on Rhura Pente for 25 years, but the ship just happened to still be there when it was time to break out

Click to expand...

Actually, Uhura wasn't very specific.

I was tracking solar systems and I picked up an emergency transmission from a Klingon prison planet. A Klingon armada was destroyed, 47 ships.

Click to expand...

That's ALL we got.

It's perfectly conceivable that Narada was being held in a remote research facility, but the Klingons never figured out how to dismantle it, or even take control of its systems. According to non-canon source, "Star Trek: Countdown", the ship was retrofitted with some reverse-engineered 24th century Borg technology which made it adaptable and impregnable.

Nero could have escaped, spent quite a bit of time looking for it, then steal it back and use it to free his comrades from Rura Penthe.

There's a fuckton of retarded shit in this movie, but the fans' capacity to overblow things never ceases to amaze.

Click to expand...

You're complaing about things from deleted scenes. In the movie itself, Nero simply waited 25 years for Spock to arrive, in order to get the weapon with which he could get revenge and capture the #1 guy he wanted revenge upon.

The complaint's thus reduced to, "he was more patient than I think he should have been"

The guy was such an obsessive hater people even referenced him on trekweb.com forums

LOL.....

Click to expand...

Obsessive haters pop up from now and then, that's normal, I guess... I know of long time posters who left certain forums because they couldn't cope with everyone around them not sharing their hate. It's like they were disappointed that so many people turned their backs on their one true messiah Gene Roddenberry. BTW, this happened both in 2001 (ENT) and in 2009 (ST XI). History literally repeated itself.

Also, people would occasionally register to a message board just to rant about ST being dead, then get permabanned for calling everyone who disagreed with them idiots.

And then, there are some who still fight the righteous war for the one true Star Trek, and don't mind getting mocked.

Sure. 2001. Plebeians bitch about not being able to sit through it all the time.

Click to expand...

Was 2001 originally conceived to be exciting and was rendered boring by removing the plot-holes?

I think the implication is that plot-holes are the inevitable byproduct of action stories. I think they are the byproduct of writers taking lazy shortcuts to infuse a plot with action and drama, but not that it is inevitable.

Aliens I think is a good example of an action movie that is not chock full of plot holes, or at least if it does have them, they are pretty hard to detect.

I think the implication is that plot-holes are the inevitable byproduct of action stories. I think they are the byproduct of writers taking lazy shortcuts to infuse a plot with action and drama, but not that it is inevitable.